Blue Canary Corporation v. City of Milwaukee’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he impairment of First Amendment values is slight to the point of being risible since the expressive activity involved in the kind of striptease entertainment provided in a bar has at best a modest social value ....”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Blue Canary Corporation v. City of Milwaukee · Ben's Bar, Inc. v. Village of Somerset

2. “[l]iquor and sex are an explosive combination”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Blue Canary Corporation v. City of Milwaukee · Ben's Bar, Inc. v. Village of Somerset

3. ““prior restraint” ... mean[s] censorship — an effort by administrative methods to prevent the dissemination of ideas or opinions thought dangerous or offensive. The censor’s concern is with the content of speech, and the ordinary judicial safeguards are lacking. “Prior restraints” that do not have this character are reviewed under the much more permissive standard applicable to restrictions merely on the time, place, or manner of expression. See, e.g., MacDonald v. City of Chi., [ 243 F.3d 1021, 1031 (7th Cir.2001)]; Thomas v. Chi. Park Dist., [ 227 F.3d 921, 923-24 (7th Cir.2000)]. Permit requirements are routinely imposed on the use of public parks and other public spaces for expressive uses, including entertainment and political demonstrations ...”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 158 F. Supp. 3d 743 - Boardroom Entertainment MKE, LLC v. City of Milwaukee